nerdgirl

omg...lmao. Just in case the pop culture example to which I was referring was unclear: 'Virgin Mary' toast fetches $28,000. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Don't be so sure. http://i.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/2168478/RaptorJesus2-main_Full.jpg ... & you do read beyond the first paragraph:

Concur heartily. It really is an easy read too. “Most” …perhaps. How are you measuring “most”? If measured in comprsion to the Egyptian near-obsession with death among early literate societies by those who employed scribes - I agree. In recorded history Sumerian concepts of afterlife pre-date Egyptian concepts. While there are fewer examples, it is there. It was also quite a different concept from that which predominates in 21st century western/Judeo-Christian-Muslim cultures. What most today think of as heaven was reserved for the Gods, Goddess, and kings (lugals). The underworld – which was not a direct parallel to the Judeo-Christian-Muslim hell – was where most humans were thought to go after death was a pretty grim, dusty place. The Sumerians, who invented written language in the western Asia/Africa/Europe, were rather fatalistic in their conception of an afterlife. Nonetheless, it was a recorded conception of afterlife that pre-dates the Egyptians in written records. You are correct that in sheer quantity there is less written about afterlife by the Sumerians compared to the Egyptians. The largest number of cuneiform inscriptions are boring from a cultural-literature perspective: Adad has 100 sheep. Ziusudra bought them for 1000 bushels of wheat. The Sumerians recorded trade and commerce – they were more business-oriented. Anatolian burial sites with burial goods date back to 7500 BCE (9,500 years ago) support concepts of an afterlife. Vulture shrines linked to excarnation have been found at Catal Hayuk. Pre-Buddhist China (eastern) also developed a concept of the afterlife. Before that one has to start looking at Venus of Willendorf, Lascaux cave drawings, etc. What any of those conceptions mean for which, if any, is “correct,” is a whole different argument and evidence set. For me, the more interesting question …. & some may be shaking their heads in disbelief that any of this could be conceived of as interesting … is what influenced the Egyptians to have one conception (more like the Judeo-Christian-Muslim version than the Sumerian) of the afterlife versus the Sumerians versus the Bon theists of pre-Buddhist Tibet (excarnation through “sky burial”). VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Iraqi flag hoisted over Baghdad green zone Heart of U.S. occupation reverts to Iraqi control Baghdad’s Green Zone, Basra Airport Returned to Iraqi Control Iraq takes control of Green Zone New Year's Day Marks Milestone In Iraq While that is significant and will get more attention, I found more important (im-ever-ho), the return of more than 2,000 families Iraqis to eastern Baghdad to reclaim homes they had left due to security concerns over the last few years. NB: that’s “families” not individuals. That’s a major indicator of increased security. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Aaah, yes ... your nation versus your [Westphalian] state/country. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur to some extent in your statements not sure that I agree with the conclusions you draw. (I observe/experience a similar phenomenon with former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, who’s also a very smart man.

Tnagentially, in travels and discussions with Europeans mostly (altho' not exclusively), I have often heard folks mention/assert how demonstratably nationalistic Americans are. I challenged that assertion by one Norwegian by noting how many Norse houses, boats, etc. had Norwegians flags flying as opposed to incidence in America. (Both he & I have spent significant amounts of time in each other's nation.) VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur. I like to use the 6.1 - 6.5 system & TRLs, altho' I suspect Vinny, me, & maybe a couple others might get that. Happily proven wrong there tho'.

I’m curious: to what incident are you referring? I’m not familiar with that one … I’m wondering if you’re combining the drunken incident by those under his charge for which Lincoln was essentially found responsible for the behavior of those under him) and was punished by having to carry a wooden sword for two days with the time in which Lincoln purportedly prevented others in the Illinois militia from killing an old Indian, who was initially alleged to be an enemy spy, who they encountered? More on that incident. Or something else? But I’m just an unauthorized armchair Lincoln historian.

Agree. And a very happy 2009 to you Marc and to all the other folks of dz.com with whom I spar, with whom I chuckle, and who make me think.

For those who voted to change the US constitution, perhaps it’s ironic that Russia also changed it’s Constitution regarding President this week -- largely assessed to enable Putin to return to power either immediately, as Russia is experiencing greater economic difficulties than the US, or in 2012. In a world in which there is an additional requirement of military service in a branch of the US military, in addition to having eliminated President Jefferson, President John Adams, President FD Roosevelt, and President Lincoln (his 80 days chasing wild onions and killing mosquitoes were in the Illinois militia not the US Army or US Navy), one can easily think of a long list of individuals today who would be ineligible: SecState Condoleezza Rice, Gov Mike Huckabee, Gov Mitt Romney, Gov Bobby Jindal, Gov Tim Pawlenty, Sen Sam Brownback, Rep. Duncan Hunter, Rep. Tom Tancredo, Mayor Rudy Giuliani. But eligible would be Markos Moulitsas Zúñiga (US Army). And perhaps most illustrative and resonating – altho’ not the best argument, imo – of why such a requirement is not a good idea: Eligible - Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who served honorably in the US Marine Corps and the US Navy. /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Concur heartily. If one looks at my response on “What makes a good candidate for president?” + addendum from November 2007, a candidate gets a “+2” from me. There’s a big difference between valuing service and making it an institutional requirement, e.g., amending the Constitution. The error bars of Speakers Corner polls are hard to estimate. A 23% affirmative response is embarrassing. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Reasonable hypothesis. Can you provide data to support that hypothesis? Applied technology is generally engineering and development. Most tax breaks similarly go to the engineering and development side (through private companies), not to basic science. And please don't interpret that statement as disfavoring taxbreaks for companies doing innovative "R&D" ... it's just recogntion that since the era of Bell Labs ended, very little big "R" research is done in private companies (both small and large). Again, a hypothesis to investigate. I suspect I would disagree with what I think you mean ... it's hard to be certain tho' cauuse it's fairly vague. Do you mean research programs (i.e., funding programs by federal and State agencies)? Or do you mean scientists intentionally generate data and interpret results in a certain way to get money? Scientific investigations of atmospheric chemistry (i.e., climate change) go back to the late 1800s. Perhaps better example for that scenario are missile defense, biodefense, and nuclear detection. One can argue which of the three are legitimate research investments. I would argue in essentially reverse order from which I lilsted them (which is also reverse order of funding level). My argument would be based on science, threat assessments (vulnerability, capability, & motivation) for US strategic interests, and US foreign policy implications. That's policy not science. It's only science policy if I'm proposing/acting on science/RDTE programs. Policy has to prioritize; sometimes the factors that go into those priorities have nothing or little to do with science. And, at times, that's okay or even preferable, imo. If your hypothesis is true, one would have expected an increase in climate change research, yes? What has been observed? 23% decline in federal funding since 2003. Since I don't follow climate change ... perhaps, ironically, it's mostly through discussions/debates here that I find out the latest secondary and tertiary-reported policies and predictions ... would you or someone provide a link to that claim? I suspect that figure includes a lot more than just tax breaks, basic science funding, etc. to actuarial calculations of rise in insurance premiums (very similar to the projections associated with healtcare, e.g., $2.4T over ten years, 34% of GDP by 2050, ... the costs alone for dealing with strokes are expected to exceed $2.2T in 40 years). Concur. I've never suggested he was one.

There are at least three potential problematic scenarios the follow from that reasoning: (1) It suggests that in order to empathize one must have a specific experience. That’s the argument that is used to argue for eliminating jurors based on racial or ethnic grounds, e.g., if you’re not black/brown/white/red/yellow, you can’t truly understand the plight of the black/brown/white/red/yellow man. It would also suggest that there is some validity to arguments that a white President can’t represent the non-white population and vice versa … if one asserts that one has to be a member of that group to represent or empathize with the other group. (2) It also intimates that the only or most important identification for the President be with the military and with the warfighting. Being the Commander in Chief (CINC) is one role/duty of the US President not the only one. The President is also the honorary head of the Boy Scouts; no one is likely to argue membership in the Boy Scouts as a requirement for Presidency. And, yes, I intentionally chose an example at the end of the metaphorical spectrum for illustrative purposes. You are also likely aware that until a very few years ago, CINC was used with a lot more military commanders rather than solely reserved for the President. From before WWII to 2002, there was CINCPAC, CINCEUR, CINCLANT, CINCUSEUR, etc. One might build an argument that in addition to the power being concentrated in the Presidency (over the other 2 branches of government since Pres Nixon), that the Presidency has also been militarized, as evidenced by SecDef Rumsfeld's CINC memo. (3) If seeing the “results” of war is the criterion, there are likely to be other organizations whose membership has a higher percentage achieving that criterion than the military, particularly up until 5 years ago. USAID, Foreign Service Officers, Doctors Without Borders, Peace Corps, Public Health Service, CIA Operations, intelligence community analysts, all see and have to deal with the “results” of war, whereas the semi-notional acquisitions officer, public affairs officer, medical service corps member, supply clerk, may not. Your proposal also disqualifies gays & lesbians. Lastly, and what is most problematic, imo, is that the proposal exacerbates the civilian-military divide. Overwhelmingly, this community/forum (dz.com) is strongly supportive of the military – yes, one can track down rare exception. And that’s a very good thing, imo (the support not the exceptions). Institutionalizing the kind of requirements that you are suggesting is not. Your proposal formalizes that civilian-military divide. Conversely, rather than suggesting the kind of requirement you propose, perhaps you and the country would be better served by investigating the origin and proximal factors exacerbating the civilian-military divide. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Do you realize that a lot of those civilians who you cite as "our biggest weaknesses" are retired or former military? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

As has been suggested in another thread, do you think the US Constitution should be amended creating a new requirement for the President that a candidate must have active duty military service (US Army, US Navy, US Air Force, or US Marine Corps)? Should the US Coast Guard be included? Technically they are a branch of the military, although in non-war situations, the USCG is under DHS rather than DoD. What about the other two uniformed services? The US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Commissioned Corps Does it matter if the candidate was a Medal of Honor recipient or did acquisitions in Hawaii? My suspicion is that there will be a lot of folks reading this who agree with the proposed requirement notionally. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

That is exactly what you are doing, however. You proposed a requirement for the leader of the nation-state that explicitly creates a two-tiered society of those who are better in your opinion ("best" was the word you used, IIRC; please correct me if that is incorrect or does not reflect your proposal accurately) because they have been a member of the uniformed services and a lesser class who have not. You are knocking those who haven't participated in one group with whom you strongly identify. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

The way I read/interpreted the statement ... which may or may not reflect [kallend]'s intention ... was "do" not as use or employ, but "do" as the original innovative fundamental scientific research and the subsequent development of the technology including the military operations-specific development, testing, and evaluation. If the technologies (or "capabilities" in DoD-speak) intended for infantry or field operations use are not able to be transitioned to the military operator ultimately, they do not serve the mission. Guess it depends on what "do" means, eh?

Do you realize that if your advocacy had been followed the US would not have had a number of Presidents … some that perhaps were not among the best, such as President van Buren and President Cleveland … but you also sacrifice some of he best President Jefferson, President John Adams, President James Madison, President Woodrow Wilson, President Franklin Roosevelt (who was Asst Sec of the Navy but never was active duty). Even President Lincoln’s participation in the Black Hawk War is dubious as to whether it would count – it was a private Illinois militia of which he was a part for less than 80 days. When Pres Lincoln spoke of that time, which was rare, he mentioned it sardonically (to put it diplomatically) as he did not see military service as a prerequisite to the Presidency: “By the way, Mr. Speaker, did you know I am a military hero? Yes, sir; in the days of the Black Hawk War I fought, bled, and came away. Speaking of General Cass’s [then-US Rep Lincoln strongly supported the Whig candidate, General Zachary Taylor, in the 1948 election and was mocking Taylor’s Democratic Presidential challenger, General Lewis Cass, who did have a robust active duty military career like Taylor - nerdgirl] career reminds me of my own. I was not at Stillman’s defeat, but I was about as near it as Cass was to Hull’s surrender; and, like him, I saw the place very soon afterward. It is quite certain I did not break my sword, for I had none to break; but I bent a musket pretty badly on one occasion…I bent the musket by accident. If General Cass went in advance of me in picking huckleberries, I guess I surpassed him in charges upon the wild onions. If he saw any live, fighting Indians, it was more than I did; but I had a good many bloody struggles with mosquitoes, and although I never fainted from the loss of blood, I can truly say I was very often hungry.”(Speech in the United States House of Representatives on the Presidential Question, July 27, 1848) Part of strength of the US nation is the civilian led military. The military – at the highest level – exists to protect the execution of the Constitution and to protect the people, land, and non-tangibles to whom/to which the Constitution applies. The proposal is also fundamentally undemocratic. In today’s world, one might make an argument that a requirement for Peace Corps or AmeriCorps service would be just as valid if not more so. Nonetheless that would be equally undemocratic. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Okay, let's do that. It *is* a reasonable initial point of investigation and frequently an enlightening one, imo. (What is the response if the data doesn't support the hypothesis?) What are the relative funding levels for (1) Missile defense (just RDT&E + MILCON), (2) Biomedical research (& just the subset of biodefense), (3) Astronomy-related research science (not operations) + small contribution from NSF ... ONR (through USNO) and AFOSR also fund a very small amount of atsronomy research, (4) Climate Change (table also shows funding levels for the NNI [nanotechnology] and Networking and Information Technology R&D - the latter of which is twice as large as climate change research) Unfortunately, if one investigates and goes to the data, the evidence actually is counter to the research finding argument. Relative funding for climate change related research is an order of magnitude lower than missile defense (not including acquisition). Funding for climate change research has fallen 23% since 2003, by the argument advanced above, one would expect to see a decrease in interest in this area. Are you [more general than specific "you"] willing to apply that argument to those areas which the argument applies more accurately? VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

Thanks. What you wrote is illustrative of why I made my earlier assertion that the thinking on predictability of lightning is a good comparison case for evolution. I suspect evolution is better understood physical-chemical process than lightning. ? What you’ve described is on the atomic level. Yes, theoretically, interactions of charged ions is well-understood.* (* Leaving aside early 21st century post-doctoral level theoretical physics for the moment – I don’t know of a specific exception but I can imagine challenges.) The exact mechanism by which lightning occurs in nature is not well understood. When, where, and the extent (current) cannot be predicted. One can do a sort of epidemiology of lightning to statistically predict when and where it is more likely, e.g., presence of large cumulus cumulonimbus [thanks for catching that [vortexring]] clouds while standing on top of a 14,000ft peak in Colorado in the summer, has a higher probability of experiencing a lightning strike than a lot (but not all) of other places in the Continental US. Climactic predictions of probability can be done quite well. Those lightning epidemiological models can be reconciled with theoretical models (theory in the precise scientific usage, not the popular usage as a synonym of “notional” “speculative” or “hypothetical”) in some cases. There are no theoretical lightning models that are capable of generating the type of predicable results w/r/t lightning that you suggest, or that you are asking of evolution. There are theories regarding lightning formation and discharge. W/r/t discharge, there are two main competing theories: convection and precipitation. As you acknowledge, there will be a random elements to observed lightning discharge, e.g., arising due to fluid dynamics of the atmosphere. Similarly there are random elements to observed evolution. Please don’t anyone interpret what I write as saying or asserting in any way, shape, or form that there is not a heck of a lot of real science regarding lightning formation and discharge. Similarly, we can readily observe and predict (yes, predict) changes (evolution) in smaller systems (e.g., proteins and bacteria) when subjected to certain conditions, say exposure to a specific antibiotic, via evolutionary theory, or through directed evolution, aka DNA shuffling or molecular breeding. Examples of directed evolution of variety of organisms, most of the purpose in those cases was biomedical or diagnostic … ultimately for a profit by Maxygen, Inc. Again, those use theory in the same ways that one uses theories of electromagnetism, electrostatics, hydrometrics, and fluid dynamics to try to understand thunderstorm electrification and lightning. As a side tangent, when DNA shuffling was invented in the early 1990s, one concern raised was that bioterrorists would use it to evolve new, more transmissible, more lethal, more robust … basically badder “superbugs.” VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

You missed out CH, a locally produced semi-persistent incapacitant which makes certain parts of your anatomy resemble the map at the start of Bonanza. Hmmm ... so that's one of the new nominees for inclusion as CWC schedule 2 chemical, eh? Btw (or not) - that menu looks fantastic, CH notwithstanding. I've never seen Banana raita on a menu before.

Interesting case for comparison with evolution. Would you both share the basis on which you make your comments regarding predicability of lightening? On what extent is the understanding & predictability of generation/occurence of lightning? I.e., is it on the atomic/micro- or macro- level? [Belgian_Draft] provided a brief snippet upon which he indicated he based his assertion. Is yours the same? /Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

If or how Sen McCain would attempt to renegotiate the SOFA if he was elected is speculation. I don't know. It would be an interesting counter-factual a priori to play out intellectually. How would the Iraqi's respond to a McCain presidency versus an Obama presidency is more pertinent, imo ... as well as domestic Iraq politics. Negotiations of the SOFA began almost a year ago, before either Sen McCain or Sen Obama was the candidate of their respective political parties. They have had little to no direct influence on the negotiation of the bilateral agreement. So yes, there would still be some withdrawal of US military forces regardless of the next President. There has alrady been a withdrawal from some Iraqi cities even before the SOFA goes into effect. VR/Marg Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters. Tibetan Buddhist saying

I think Nerdgirl has me beat on that one. Naw … you can keep that one, if you want.